Rod Speed wrote:
> DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote
>> True...Just as so many investors brought bags of cash to internet startups ten years ago.
>
> That isnt what happened.
What didn't happen? Investor didn't bring bags of money to startups?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble Quote:
At the height of the boom, it was possible for a promising dot-com to
make an initial public offering (IPO) of its stock and raise a
substantial amount of money even though it had never made a profit
|
>> Therefore using the amount of cash infused into WiMax as a metric of it potential of success is flawed. Its not a
>> metric of its success yet as it hasn't been deployed in enough areas to evaluate.
>
> That last is a pig ignorant lie.
How so?
>> The failure of the Australian WiMax project
>
> And that is another lie. There is no such animal that has failed.
Garth Freeman does not share your opinion.
http://mobile.slashdot.org/mobile/08.../1512220.shtml
>> has now moved to the finger pointing stage,
>
> Yep, with a MUCH bigger broadband operation saying that
> their WiMax using hardware from the same supplier works fine.
Read what I said, I didn't say it was a failure for him just because it
was WiMax. I said it could be anyone's fault at this point. As in
poor vendor/carrier communication and setting expectations.
>> so we really don't have any tangible facts why it allegedly failed.
>
> Another lie.
See above.
> AND WiMax is an enhancement of wifi, which hordes use every single day too.
WiMax has absolutely no comparison to WiFi, other than they both use
radio waves.